Skip to main content

Full text of "An Analysis of our AFL-CIO role in Latin America; or, Under the covers with the CIA."

See other formats

'^ifflAlLiWWfiSiA'^l'N (»Niiie; 

30171QM0 Sa 

^ Ut ^ 

%CAM <? 

Presented by 
Renato Espinoza 


San Jose, California 
January 25, 1974 

On December 1 , 1973, the Emergency 
Committee to Defend Democracy in Cnile 
held a conference on Chile/Latin Amer- 
ica/U.S. Foreign Policy. Out of that 
conference of 300 diverse people came 
a continuing workshop on U.S. labor's 
role in Latin America. 

This paper was developed out of the 
discussions of trade unionists. In our 
attempt to penetrate the role of the 
AFL-CIO's American Institute for Free 
Labor Devel opment in Chile, we found 
the facts so startling as to be unbe- 
lievable. To put the AIFLD in pers- 
pective we found it necessary to trace 
its development through an all-but- 
hidden history of government-labor-CIA 
and corporate involvement. 

This paper is intended as background 
for the resolutions to be found in the 
back of this analysis. 

All funds raised through sales of this 
■publication are delivered to the move- 
ment of the people of Chile to free 
political prisoners^ restore full human 
rights and put an end to the military 

Copyright, F. Hirsch, San Jose, CA. 1974 
Second printing, April, 1974. 



The tragic and dramatic overthrow of the 
Popular Unity Government in Chile opens many 
questions in the labor movement which remain un- 
answered. These questions will remain unanswered 
unless there is a deliberate pursuit of answers 
/V*i the part of active and determined trade union- 
^-ts. Questions surrounding the nature of the 
i- n ^ Tolvement of officials of the AFL-CIO in Latin 
America and Chile are of such a profound nature 
Jaiat they challenge the underlying principles of 
trade unionism. 

We take pride in the protests voiced by some 
local unions and by a number of Central Labor 
Councils. The denunciations of the Chilean junta 
and its fascist-like methods on the part of such 
major names in labor as Pat Gorman, Ralph Hel- 
stein, Leonard Woodcock, Floyd Smith and Harry 
Bridges are a clarion of conscience. 

But the blame for events in Chile and in 
other Latin American and Caribbean nations cannot 
simply be placed on the military dictators who 
kill. the people in the name of "fatherland and 
liberty." The blame must also be placed on the 
multinational corporations which reach out from 
North American soil to multiply their wealth on 
the labor and resources of such places as Chile. 
The blame must fall on those in government who 
guarantee the profits of the multinationals - not 
just with risk-free insurance and credit and loan 
manipulations - but with arms, troops when they 
deem necessary, and with the ever threatening 
presence of the CIA. More important for us in 
the labor movement, we must discover as exactly, 
as possible just what the role of U.S. labor has 
been in clearing the brush for the advancing cor- 
porations, the State Department and the CIA. That 
we have played such a role is a fact; only the ex- 
tent of that role is in question. 

Has the U.S. labor movement allowed itself 
to be shanghaied into service as aide to the junta 
executioners of Latin America? Has such a thing 
happened through the democratic processes we 
boast, or has our power and representation been 


r;>t. ,M>AW«j»if.\ ijfc w*j>>. ,>r-8»fi5SV 

Under the Covers 

hijacked by the CIA for use against our brothers 
and sisters abroad? 

There is enormous evidence to show AFL-CIO 
complicity in the overthrow of democratic govern- 
ments elected fairly by the people of Latin Amer- 
ica and the Caribbean. Well-documented facts'. 
suggest that we of the AFL-CIO allowed our powder 
to be used to bring about the murderous coup in' 
Chile which outlawed the Chilean labor movement > 
killed tens of thousands and abolished the c ivi" 1 
and human rights of the people. If such is i:rL le / 
it sorely diminishes our stature as trade union- ~ 
ists. If such decisions were made behind cl 
doors in our Washington offices, they must bi 
brought out and questioned, reviewed and altered 
to the satisfaction of the rank-and-file of our 
organizations. If that cannot be done, it is 
time to drop the words "democratic" and "free" 
from our statements of principle. Anything less 
is hypocrisy. 

Shortly after the September 11 , 19 73 coup in 
Chile, Dr. Ernesto Galarza, a well-known author, 
former labor chief of the Pan American Union, who 
for ten years was the organizer for the National 
Agricultural Workers Union (predecessor of AWOC, 
and now UFWU) , attempted to open a dialog with 
AFL-CIO Legislative Director Andrew Biemiller. 
Biemiller had testified against a trade bill de- 
signed to open commerce with the eastern countries 
He objected to dealing with "countries which re- 
press their population, thwart formation of free 
trade unions, and stifle political dissent." 
Galarza asked why the AFL-CIO leveled its attack 
only on the eastern countries when "the military 
assassinations that the Chilean junta has been 
carrying out systematically" fit the description 
so closely. Yet the Chilean situation was never 
cited by the AFL-CIO. Dr. Galarza charged that 
Biemiller 1 s statement kills "a myth to which the 
AFL-CIO has been paying homage for decades, name- 
ly, that there is a Dear Sir and Brother-hood 
among all workers of the Americas. " Biemiller 
failed to so much as send brother Galarza a re- 
ply. The same letter was sent to Andrew McLellan, 
AFL-CIO Inter- American representative; again no 


Under the Covers 

Thqre is only one reason why these AFL-CIO 
officials would not respond to a man of Dr. Gal- 
arza* s stature: their reply could never s,tand 
the scrutiny of honest trade unionists. 


The mechanism of the AFL-CIO in Latin Amer- 
ica is the American Institute for Free Labor De- 
velopment (AIFLD) . This organization was formed 
as a non-profit corporation in 1962. Its presi- 
dent is none other than George Meany. Chairman 
of the Board of Trustees is J. Peter Grace, chief 
executive of W. R. Grace & Company , a multinat- 
ional corporation with extensive interests in 
Latin America. The AIFLD Board of Trustees is 
made up largely of leading labor officials and 
corporate executives with enormous holdings in 
Latin America and the Caribbean countries. 

AIFLD was set up as the latest step in the 
program of AFL (now AFL-CIO) to split the left- 
ist labor unions in Latin America and increase 
U.S. influence. Its stated goal is "the devel- 
opment of the democratic trade union movement in 
Latin America and the Caribbean. " Whether or 
not the stated goal conforms to the reality of 
its practice is a crucial question. 

Originally an educational project, AIFLD 
now operates in several other fields - social 
projects, credit facilities, social action and 
"community development." The educational phase 
of the operation is massive. In Colombia and 
Peru it has trained as much as 5% of the union 
membership - far exceeding any AFL-CIO training 
programs offered to unionists in the U.S. In 
local seminars, people are chosen to participate 
in area-wide or nationwide seminars; from these 
are selected the most likely people (often they 
are not even unionists) who are offered a three- 
month course in AIFLD 's training center at Front 
Royal, Virginia. During this time the trainee's , 
family receives a stipend and the trainee gets a 
per diem payment in excess of what he or she 
would earn on the job. When the Front Royal 
course is completed, trainees are returned home 
where they continue on the AIFLD payroll for at 
least an additional nine months. 


Under the Covers 

Subjects covered at Front Royal include i 
The I nter- American and International Labor 

Adult Education 
Instruction in Cooperatives 
Time and Motion Study 
Credit Unions 

The Cooperative Movement; Techniques and Problems 
The AIFLD - Department of Social Projects 
History and Structure of the North American Labor 

Political Systems: Democracy and Totalitarianism 

The courses are heavily larded with material 

similar to that dispensed in the Sixties by the 
Christian Anti-Communist Crusade. (In fact, one 

of the first Directors of AIFLD was listed as a 
speaker for that group.) They do not deal with 
problems created by multinational corporations, 
American or European neo^imperialism, oligarchic 
national control, land redistribution or the fas- 
cist patterns of military governments* They men- 
tion no courses relating to strike strategy. The 
basic premise of the educational program is that 
all solutions will come to working people through 
collective bargaining and opposing communism in 
collaboration with management and government. In 
addition to the above mentioned courses, AIFLD has 
added one and two year courses in labor economics 

The social programs of AIFLD are generally 
brought into play to fill some of the needs of 
members in unions which are engaged in direct con- 
flict with leftist unions. These programs are 
used to "showcase" the benefits of AFL-CIO style 
unions* Housing development is the program given 
the most publicity in AIFLD reports. Unfortu- 
nately the thousands of housing units they con- 
struct in Latin America are priced beyond the 
means of average workers and the overwhelming 
numbers of poor people* This housing is more 
suited to the income of high wage earners and 

In addition to limiting costs, AIFLD hous- 
ing is tied with strings in such a manner that, 
from time to time, it has been rejected even by 


Under the Covers 

anti-communist unions which seek to maintain 

their autonomy. According to a U*S* Senate study, 
"AIFLD apparently demands that, in all questions 
relating to a given housing project, it be allowed 
to act with complete authority on behalf of the 
Latin American union involved. Many unions feel 
this is too high a price to pay.* [Survey of the 
Alliance for Progress, Labor Policies and Pro- 
grams, by the staff of the Committee on Foreign 
Relations, U.S. Senate, 7/15/68.] 

The other social projects are carried out 
under the guidance of AIFLD advisers and are paid 
for through US AID (Alliance for Progress) funds. 
In Chile the .funds were loosely accounted for; 
the Senate study charged that billings were "pre- 
pared on the basis of unsupported estimates" 
which "demonstrate serious financial management 
weakness in the AID-AIFLD contract relationship." 
[Ibid. p. 48.] According to David Bell, former 
director of USAID: 

American labor people work continuously 
in Latin America as advisers to labor leaders 
who are trained as sources of Ideas and stimu- 
lation for our type of labor union. ..It is 
intended to work directly with the leadership 
of the Latin American trade unions and educate 
them and persuade them of the direction to 
follow that we think and our American labor 
leaders think is sensible and so on. 

If Bell's statement seems to bind American labor 
leaders in AIFLD too tightly under State Depart- 
ment AID direction, it is no coincidence* William 
C, Doherty, Jr. , Executive Director of AIFLD, 
claims that 92% of his budget comes out of govern- 
ment funds; the rest is out of the AFL-CIO and 
"some 95 business establishments with interests 
in Latin America." [AIFLD Booklet, l962-72 4 p. 1 7, ] 

The general approach of AIFLD is laid out 
for us by Doherty in a 5/6/69 report to the Senate 
Committee : 

After the AFL-CIO had decided to set up 
the organization, conversations ensued between 
our labor leaders and leaders in the United 
States* and we found there was common ground. 

Under the Covers 

Under the Covers 

David Rockefeller and Peter Grace 

t want to mention all their names 

because I'm sure to leave some out - decided 

that we had a lot to gain from cooperating 
Latin America* and that we would try 
away some of the classic concepts 
views management, 

People 1 i tee 

- and I don 



to throw 
of how labor 
and how management views 
labor, and to see if we could not do some co- 
operating, What we did was set up the AIFLD 
in cooperation with management* 

This approach is given further depth by J, Peter 
Grace : 

We need to understand that today the 
choice in Latin America is between democracy 
and communism. We must bear in mind that we 
cannot allow communist propaganda to divide 
us as between liberals and conservatives, or 
between business and labor, or between the 
American people and their government. .. In this 
organization we have a joint venture that the 
communists cannot hope to match - one of free 
men from all walks of life working together in 
consensus for a common goal without selfish 
purpose. [AIFLD Pamphlet, "A Decade of worker 
to Worker Cooperation.] 
Grace's holdings extend to Chile, where the Grace 
Company has made unprecedented profits ("without 
selfish purpose") for more than a hundred years. 

The U.S. government expectations of AIFLD are 
best expressed in the 1966 State Department con- 
tract* which handed over $645*000 to Doherty's 
apparatus for use in Chile [AID-LA #259, Chile]: 

The target of this activity is to 
strengthen and develop a trade union leader- 
ship that is capable of organizing a demo- 
cratic labor movement in Chile which can 
participate and contribute to national de- 
vel opment . . . 

and to develop and implement 

...small impact projects intended to meet the 
needs of workers' groups and develop a friendly 
attitude to the United States. 

It takes more than a fair share of arrogance 
to assume that Chileans have not or cannot organ- 
ize their own democratic labor movement. The 
labor movement in Chile began as early as our own 

with effective general strikes as far back as 
1890, and Chileans have organized a higher per- 
centage of the working class than the AFL-CIG 
here at home. At the time of the coup there were 
two million Chileans in unions out of a popula- 
tion of ten million. The U.S. has some 20 million 
organized workers in a population of 210 million* 
U*S. unions have 25% of the work force organized; 
in Chile it was 90%. The difference is that the 
democratically elected leaders of the majority 
of Chilean workers are oriented toward socialism 
and against collaboration with the corporations 
which exploit their labor,, many of which are to 
be found in the membership and directorate of 

Mote also that the $645,600 in the AIFLD 
Chile budget for 1966 was an expenditure of U.S. 
workers' dues money and taxes - more than three 
times greater than the budget of the entire 
Chilean labor movement. Fortunately or not for 
AIFLD, the organization of working people is not 
always a commodity to be bought and sold. The 
Chilean unions consolidated their power to the 
point where they were able to elect the Allende 
government and take control of their country's 
major corporations. Those corporations, to the 
discredit of unionists in the U.S., were repre- 
sented best by AIFLD. 


By 1967 the AIFLD budget was well over $6 
million, a figure three times the annual AFL-CIO 
budget. Though we still have more than 60 mill- 
ion workers in this country who are unorganised, 
the AFL-CIO has never asked for government funds 
to use here in the U.S. for organizing a "demo- 
cratic labor movement." In fact, AFL-CIO "s De- 
partment of Organizing has, in just a few years, 
dwindled from a staff of 600 to an extremely cau- 
tious staff of about 300, and those remaining are 
fearful that the entire Organising Department 
soon will be dismantled. 

Under the Covers 

On the other hand, the government is not only 
disinterested in offering money for trade union 
organization, but such expenditure would be il- 

in 1966 a small group of organizers who had 
been close to the farmworkers latched onto some 
Office of Economic Opportunity funds. Its pur- 
pose was to establish a training center for 
"rural organizers" and it was called California 
Center for Community Development (CCCD) , After 
much hassle t the funding came through under the 
protective wing of a few Democratic politicians. 
The CCCD program was similar to AIFLD in struc- 
ture, but not in outlook. The organizer-trainees 
spent three weeks at the Center and then stayed 
on a payroll for six months in the field. The 
very first time a "trainee" was found organizing 
a farmworker picketline without covering his 
tracks , the Feds moved in and the program was 
shut down* It was clearly evident that the U.S. 
government was not going to allow any trade union 
organizing to be funded through the taxes paid by 
working people and it had the law to back it up. 


As for the corporations' interest in "organ- 
izing a democratic labor movement" in Latin 
America, that is patently ridiculous. The whole 
history of the union movement in this country 
flies in the face of such an idea* Even an un- 
educated examination of a partial list of corpo- 
rate supporters of AIFLD reveals companies which 
have foughjt unionization at an immense cost in 
the lives p£ working people. There are the min- 
ing companies - Kennecott, Anaconda and American 
Smelting and Refining, which fought bloody bat- 
tles with the Western Federation of Miners, Mine, 
Mill and Smelter Workers and, to this day, the 
United Steel Workers. 

There is Headers Digest, which has put out 

material supporting the an ti- union "right to work" 
drives and whose most published contributor, inci- 
dentally, is Richard Nixon. 

There is IBM, which has successfully done 
everything in its power to keep out unions. 

Under the Covers 

There are the Rockefeller corporations, the 

major oil companies and the great banking giants 
which have denied workers the right to organize 
by scheming! brute force and racism? some of these 
succumbed only when the workers became so powerful 
that continued company resistance was uneconomical. 

Among the companies affiliated with AIFLD are 
a slew which have been nailed in the courts and in 
the Watergate hearings for oversized and illegal 
contributions to Nixon's campaigns and who bene- 
fit far beyond their donations in inflated super 
profits taken from the pockets of unionists and 
unorganized workers across the United States - 

The entire history of trade unionism shows 
that the only time a company is interested in 
trade union representation for its workers is 
when it adds up to increased profits* Corpora- 
tions have always tried to put together company 
unions or their equivalent when there was a dan- 
ger of organization by a bona fide labor organi- 
zation. The same California growers who supported 
the so-called "right to work" law today promote 
the Teamsters to represent farmworkers. They 
don't do that because they want a union? they do 
it because they want some organization - any 
organisation - to help them avoid dealing with a 
true and militant representative of the men and 
women who work in the fields. It is precisely 
the same with the 95 corporations in AIFLD' s 
fold. They are interested in a stable labor 
situation through which they can continue their 
outrageous rates of profit. They need the same 
status quo which has institutionalized massive 
and gross poverty in Latin America, They view 
cooperation with the program of Aifld as the most 
economic means of fulfilling their manifest des- 
tiny as super profiteers. The AIFLD corporations 
are run by hardheaded businessmen; their collabo- 
ration with the AFL-CIO in Latin America is not 
based on softheadedness. It is simply the best 
available method for them to maintain corporate 
control over the lives and productive power of 
the working people in the various countries, 


Under the Covers 


There are certain and clear contradictions 
among the AFL- CIO, the U.S. government and the 
multinational corporations. Their unity in AIFLD 
seemingly violates the contradictions. Conflict 
of interest ought to characterize the relationship 
between the members of the tri -partite alliance; 
yet the conflict fails to divide these partners. 
In order to understand this,, we must look briefly 
at the role of U.S. labor in foreign policy before 
the emergence of AIFLD, for the historic roots of 
the present corporation/government/ labor coopera- 
tion go bacJc more than a half century. 

The AFL policy, which developed during World 
War I, was first of all against American Social- 
ists who opposed the war and in support of the 
war policies of the Woodrow Wilson administration. 
Samuel Gompers' policy of "bread-and-butter" craft 
unionism was under sharp attack by the Socialists 
in the labor movement. Their militancy, indus- 
trial union policies and political action were not 
only an embarrassment to the Gompers forces, but 
challenged their conservative leadership. The 
conflict drove Gompers into anti -Socialist coopera- 
tion with "labor's friends." One of the prime 
examples of "labor* s friends" was Woodrow Wilson. 
A personal friendship flowered between Gompers and 
the President, It was only a short step to col- 
laborating with the friends of "labor's friends/ 1 
- labor's enemies - who sat on the other side of 
the bargaining table. The collaboration became 
so cozy that the first labor delegations sent to 
confer with European unions had to pass muster 
with the National Civic Federation, an organiza- 
tion of leading businessmen and top labor lead- 
ers founded by Mark Banna and financed by the 
Morgan interests. The interplay of these rela- 
tionships brought about many bitter situations in 
which craft unions were used to break strikes in 
the mass production industries, Coay collabora- 
tion principles left the unions defenseless by 
the Twenties, when the rank-and-file was sub- 
jected to speed-up, mechanization, yellow-dog 
contracts and the right- to-work scheme of the 
"American Plan," 

Under the Covers 


Gompers' willingness to support Wilson's war 
aims paid off in some respects. It gave the lab- 
or officials new prestige, hobnobbing with high 
leadership in industry , and it made the AFL a 
junior partner in some government planning re- 
lated to the war effort. It also put Gompers 
in the position of enlisting the aid of a group 
of pro-war Socialists who had splintered from the 
main group of their party. It became necessary 
for Gompers and Wilson to use the Socialist repu- 
tations of such men in order to strengthen the 
resolve of Socialist labor leaders in Europe to 
continue the war. 

In this period, Sam Gompers - having become 
a "labor statesman" - leaned heavily on the pro- 
war ex-Socialists who formed the Social Democratic 
League. In their European tours (trying to con- 
vince the Socialist-oriented unions to stick 
behind the war effort} they began to use the words 
"free" and "democratic" to characterize those 
unions which were not led by Socialists and, later, 
by "bolsheviks" and "communists," 

Algernon Simons, a leader of the Social Demo- 
cratic League, was in Italy when Gompers toured 
for the Wilson war effort. There Gompers earned 
the scorn of the largely socialist labor movement, 
with one notable exception: he received warm 
praise from a pro-war Italian * patriot" who had 
broken with the Socialist Party and founded his 
own newspaper - that was Benito Mussolini. 
[North Winship, "Gompers 1 Visit to Milan, Oct. 
17, 191 fl.] The term "democratic" was already 
thoroughly perverted in the jargon of the AFL 
when, in a note to Gompers, Simons characterised 
Mussolini's publication as a "democratic, pro-war 
paper." [Memo of Algie H. Simons, Gompers* Manu- 
scripts, Sept, 12, 1918.] 

From that period on, the AFL was involved in 
the sphere of foreign policy/ acting for succeed- 
ing administrations and working in conjunction 
with the Social Democratic League and its inheri- 
tors r Jay Loves tone (chairman of the AFL-CIO 
International Affairs Department) and his side^ 
kick, Irving Brown. Both are listed as operatives 
for the Central intelligence Agency, [Julius 
Mader, "Who's Who in the CIA/ 1 p. 75, 318.] 


Under the Covers 

With the advent of the Russian Revolution at 
the end of World War I, the world labor movement 
underwent sharp polarization. Labor in Europe 
and Latin America gained widely in strength and 
moved to the left, while the AFL did its best to 
continue backing Wilsonian policy. There were 
sharp differences among leftist labor leaders - 
they divided into various groupings; moderate 
socialists, anarchists, anarcho-sindicalists , 
Trotskyists and Leninists - but the AFL stood 
fast against any group which did not pay total 
allegiance to the capitalist economic system. 

The various socialist unions held inter- 
national meetings and formed labor alliances 
which struck fear of revolution into government 
circles. To combat this, Gompers participated 
in the formation of the International Labor Or- 
ganization (ILO) under the auspices of the 
League of Nations, Though ILO was ineffective, 
it brought the previously covert partnership of 
labor, government and business into the open. 
Each national delegation was to be composed of 
representatives of the three sectors, setting 
the precedent for a policy of collaboration be- 
tween labor leaders and industrialists, which 
today shows up in AIFLD. 


The period between the wars saw a large 
growth in U.S. corporate investment in Latin Am- 
erica, basically in agriculture and production 
of raw materials for industry. The Latin Ameri- 
can workers' organizations generally did not fol- 
low the "bread-and-butter" unionism of the AFL. 
Such a policy would have been impossible under 
landowner oligarchic governments which dealt 
with strikes at gunpoint and thought little of 
bringing "order" into labor relations by massa- 
creing workers, Latin Americans had the sever- 
est extremes of great individual wealth and mass 
poverty and starvation. The common view in 
South and Central America was that their misery 
was protected and perpetuated through economic 
control by U.S. business, backed by our govern- 
ment and the Monroe Doctrine. For that reason, 

Under the Covers 


Latin American unions geared themselves toward 
political and revolutionary solutions; they felt 
a need to wrest control from the foreign corpora- 
tions and those hand-picked to serve them, 

Gompers moved into the Latin American scene 
with the Fan American Federation of Labor (PAFL) 
which he personally initiated. At the opening 
convention in Laredo in November, 19 IS, Gompers 
was accompanied by the U.S. Secretary of Labor. 
[Sinclair Snow, "Samuel Gompers and the Pan Am- 
erican Federation of Labor," Doctoral Dissertation, 
Umv, of Virginia, i960, pp. 68-71.] rt was 
significant that PAFL was financed directly by 
the U.S. government, its newspaper given a free 
mailing permit and published in Washington. This 
relationship carries over to AIPLD today. Gompers 
explained it: "The fundamental policy I have pur- 
sued in organising the Pan American Federation of 
Labor is based upon the spirit of the Monroe Doc- 
trine, to establish and maintain the most friendly 
relations between the governments of the United 
States and the Pan American countries." [Samuel 
Gompers, "Seventy Years of Life and Labor," pp. 
321 * 512*] 

The PAFL lasted slightly more than ten years. 
it failed to reflect and represent the interests 
and needs of working people. When it faded in 
the depression of the 30s , PAFL was replaced by 
the Latin American Confederation of Workers [CTAL), 
an anti-imperialist confederation which succeeded 
in organising millions of workers of all politi- 
cal shades in Latin America. CTAL was free from 
Worth American domination? though it included 
Marxists in leadership, it enjoyed the support of 
the newly- formed CIO* 


During World War II, there was a relaxation 
of tensions between the right and the left, 
nationally and internationally. Most union or- 
ganizations held the defeat of the Axis the 
uppermost consideration. It was not until after 
the war - when communist- led unions and socialist 
nations were in ascendancy internationally - that 
the old battle stations were resumed. The United 


Under the Covers 

States emerged from the war stronger than it had 
entered it, and the economies of Europe were 
devastated* The Marshall Plan to rebuild Western 
European economies under U,5, financial and mili- 
tary leadership began, and the "cold war" got 
into gear. The Truman administration needed the 
unions to deal with the left labor groups of 
Europe and the AFL leaders were there - ready and 

Toward the end of World War IX the AFL set 
up the Free Trade Union Committee (FTUC). AFL 
head William Green, George Meany and David Dubin- 
sky of the ILGWU chose a man to head FTUC who had 
served Dubinsky as a reliable "anti -communist ex- 
pert." Jay Loves tone. Loves tone had been expelled 
from Communist Party leadership in 1929 and in the 
Thirties had held a position leading an anti- 
communist witchhunt for Homer Martin, United Auto 
Workers head. When Martin was defeated by Walter 
Reuther. it was not long before Loves tone went on 
the ILGWU payroll, fingering his former friends 
for Dubinsky. 

When the FTUC position was offered, Love stone 
called on Irving Brown, his No. 1 man in^the UAW 
anti -communist crusade. Brown dropped his job as 
Director of the Labor and Manpower Administration 
in Europe to once again become Loves tone *s chief 
aide - this time for bigger stakes. These two 
were to carry their crusading anti-communism 
against the growing strength of the left in the 
European labor movements. 

As leader of FTUC, Love stone became the de 
facto expert on international affairs for the AFL, 
where he has remained despite strong CIO objec- 
tions at the time of the merger of AFL and CIO. 
The United Auto Workers 1 objection to Loves tone 
was high on the list of grievances, leading up to 
the recent departure of the UAW from AFL- CIO* 


Irving Brown went to work in Europe, oper- 
ating in France, Germany and Greece. It was in 
France that the general pattern of action was set 

Under the Covers 

with the compound fracturing of every known trade 
union principle. 

The workers of France democratically had 
elected communists to the leadership of the CGT 
(the French equivalent of AFL-CIO) and, in so 
doing, they ousted those labor leaders who had 
served the Nazis during the German occupation of 
France. According to Brown, "this had been done 
unjustly under Communist instigation," and con- 
tributed to a l1 lack of manpower on the non-Commu- 
nist side*" Brown's program was to select CGT 
members, finance them with "laundered" money in 
secret deals to which neither the AFL nor the 
recipients would admit, and start splitting the 
CGT, when the recipients were strong enough, 
they were then aided in forming a dual union 
outside the CGT, the Force Guvriere (FO) . 

The FO then, with a small membership of 
mostly white collar unions # fought against the 
CGT and its "bread-and-butter" demands - which 
were the wages demanded by the overwhelming num- 
ber of French workers. All of this information 
is thoroughly documented via the original let- 
ters of Irving Brown in a collection of the 
correspondence of Florence Thorne, who was Com- 
pers' secretary and remained in the AFL head 
office until the mid-fifties. [Ronald Radosh, 
" American Labor and U.S. Foreign Policy*" pp, 
310-323, ] 

The policy of dual unionism, support of Nazi 
collaborators and AFL-laundered money was not 
enough. By 19 47, the CIA was born and the "Free" 
Trade Union Committee had a new source of funds. 

Brown needed money to import scabs from 
Italy, replete with goon squads to protect them 
in efforts to break a dock strike in Marseilles, 
Thomas W, Braden, European Director of CIA from 
1950 to 19.54, reports; 

Loves tone and his assistant, Irving 
Brown* , .needed it to pay off strongarm squads 
in Mediterranean ports so that American sup- 
plies could be unloaded against the opposition 


Under the Covers 

of communist dock workers. . . With funds from 
Dubinsky^ union, they organized the Force 
Ouvriere, a noit communist union. When they 
ran out of money they appealed to the CIA, 
Thus began the secret subsidy of free trade 
unions..." [Thomas W. Braden, "I'm Glad the 
CIA is Immoral," Saturday Evening Post, May 
20, 1967, pp. 10-12. ] 


The basic tactic in each European country 
touched by the PTUC and representing - without 
our knowledge -us members of the American labor 
movement, was rabid and unconditional anti-commu- 
nism. The paranoic pre-McCarthyism of Jay Love- 
stone, to the exclusion of all other considera- 
tions, stood in the way of any real aid to so- 
called "free democratic 1 ' trade unionism. The 
FTUC looked for the red bogeyman and ran to the 
opposite corner and, in fits of tantrum, hurled 
the weight of the AFL and the CIA. This occurred 
even when the democratic decision of the workers 
clearly favored a left- led union. Pursuing anti- 
communism in lieu of supporting democratically 
chosen representatives of the workers, Jay Love- 
stone's committee earned the contempt of organ- 
ized workers in every nation touched by FTUC. 
In country after country they found themselves 
in league not only with the CIA, but with fas- 
cists, monarchists, opportunists and thugs. Even 
if we assume that their purposes were the highest, 
the result of their work was to leave behind a 
divided and weakened labor movement, open prey to 
their home country employers and to the multi- 
national industrial giants, 


Who was calling the shots? Was it the Ameri- 
can working people? We in the trade union move- 
ment never voted that the program of the FTUC 
should divide and castrate European union move- 
ments by any means necessary! Did this program 
simply spring from the head of David Dubinsky*s 

employee, Jay Loves tone, who rose - without any 
election - to be the hired far-righthand of George 

Meany? it is more likely that the program was 
shaped, as is usually the case, by the men who 
paid the bills in the inner sanctum of the CIA. 

It would not be possible to accurately prove 
the extent to which the CIA has become the pay- 
master in shaping the policies of our labor move- 
ment, but there have been startling disclosures 
in the press. The international Federation of 
Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers was reported to 
receive .$25 r 0Q0 per month from a CIA conduit, the 
Andrew Hamilton Foundation. This money was for 
use in Latin America in cooperation with the AIFLD. 
[Washington Post, Feb. 23, 1967.] Gerald J.Poulsan 
of the International Association of Food and Allied 
Workers claimed that his organisation had been 
used as a cover for CIA agents . He said that 
eight such agents took orders from Andrew McLellan, 
[New Yorlr Times, Feb, 23, 1967.] The Washington 
Post identified William C* Doherty, Jr. as a man 
"closely identified with CIA operations." Drew 
Pearson noted in his Feb. 24, 19 67 column that 
Irving Brown "spends CIA money r " and that ORIT 
takes direction from Loves tone and with it takes 
CIA money." Pearson pointed out the role of Jos- 
eph Bierne, Secretary-Treasurer of AIFLD, in 
channeling CIA funds, and claimed that CIA money 
accepted by labor organizations is "estimated at 
about $100 million a year." 

On the other hand, George Meany says: 

Not one penny of CIA money has ever 

come into the AFL or the AFL-CIO to my 
knowledge over the last twenty years, 
and I say to you, if it had come in, I 
would know about it. [5/6/6 7. ] 

It is surely not likely that, if an AFL-CIO offi- 
cial were receiving CIA money secretly, he would 
be running to the "honest plumber," Meany, to 
inform him about graft* Meany 's insistence that 
he "would know about it" must come from his cer- 
tainty that the CIA would not lay a dollar on a 


Under the Covers 

union without his okay. On page 354 of "Who's 
Who in the CIA" we find a curious listing: 
"George Meany; from 194 9 work for CIA." 


The FTUC became active in Latin America 
after World War II through the activities of 
Serafino Romualdi, another hireling of David 
Dubinsky* As an emigre from fascist Italy , it 
would seem that Romualdi would have been a prime 
candidate for work in his native country but, in- 
stead, he accepted a position as the No* 1 func- 
tionary in Latin America. 

The dominant labor group in Latin America 
after World War II was the Latin American Con- 
federation of Labor (CTAL) . Although comprised 
of a cross-section of political influences, CTAL 
was generally leftist in its orientation* Rom- 
ualdi took the task of putting together an anti- 
communist dual federation to break the political 
power of the CTAL. According to AFL's past prac- 
tices, such an undertaking called for the coopera- 
tion and assistance, if not the leadership, of 
the U.S. government* 

With the CIO supporting the CTAL, the State 
Department was cagey about taking sides between 
our two labor federations. Winning affiliates 
among rightist unions was difficult without the 
okay of their governments # and their oligarchs 
were unwilling to give that okay without official 
sanction of the U.S. State Department, To soften 
up the State Department, Romualdi launched an 
attack that made him the forerunner of the late 
Senator Joe McCarthy, charging that government 
policymakers, "If not openly allied, they are 
definitely supporting groups in Latin America 
who are enemies of the American way of life and 
who are followers of the Communist Party line." 
[AFL Convention, Committee on International Re- 
lations, May 5, 1946.] The attack was suffici- 
ent to shake State Department functionaries and 
resulted in their direct cooperation with FTUC* 

Under the Covers 


This alliance was promptly cemented with endorse- 
ments by kelson Rockefeller and other major in- 
dustrial leaders. The doors then swung open for 
Romualdi *s welcome into every state-sanctioned 
"free* trade union office in Latin America. 

By 1948 Romualdi and FTUC had driven a dual 
union wedge into the labor movement of Latin 
America. The Inter- American Confederation of 
Labot (CIT) was born, comprised largely of minor- 
ity factions from seventeen countries. The "free 
and democratic" CIT lasted almost two years when 
changing relations between AFL and CIO allowed 
for a bolder and broader approach in Latin America. 
The fine hand of government interference stroked 
the healing wounds in the U.S. labor movement. 


A relatively unknown labor lawyer appeared 
on the scene in Chicago. Fresh from service in 
the OSS (precursor of CIA) , Arthur Goldberg was 
chosen general counsel to the CIO* His major in- 
volvement between 1947 and *49 was engineering the 
split in the CIO which resulted in the expulsion 
of ten independent ("communist- dominated" ) unions* 
The expulsion of these left-oriented unions and 
the growing anti-communist hysteria then opened 
the way for AFL and CIO agreement on international 
matters. The CIO withdrew from supporting CTAL 
and entered the newly formed ant i -communist "free 
world" labor grouping f the international Confed- 
eration of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU). The CIT 
then broadened its scope to become the "Pan Am- 
erican" branch of the ICFTU, the Inter -American 
Regional Organ! zation of Workers fORIT) . 

Arthur Goldberg rose from engineering the 
expulsion of the "red" CIO unions to become 
"architect* of the 15 5 5 merger of the AFL and CIO. 
This fitted the two major federations under the 
international policy of Lovestone and FTUC. The 
"liberal" Goldberg had served the needs of Love- 
stone, the State Department and the CIA more ef- 
fectively than any other single individual. 


Under the Covers 

Within three years he became Secretary of Labor, 
then went on to the Supreme Court and, finally, 
to the United Nations, [Goldberg is lUted in 
"Who's Who in the CIA," p. 200.] 


ORIT served as the AFL and GIO arm in Latin 
America for more than ten years before the domina- 
tion by North American unionists finally limited 
its effectiveness. A staff report of the Senate 

Committee on Foreign Relations {July 15, 1968) 

says ORIT: 

was originally founded for the specific 
purpose of combatting Communist infiltra- 
tion of the Latin American labor movement, 
ORIT has never quite solved the problem 
of emphasis as between fighting communism 
and strengthening democratic trade unions 
, ,. Generally speaking., in ORIT North Amer- 
icans have emphasised anti- communism? 
Latin Americans have emphasized democratic 
trade unionism* 

This is one reason for what seems to be a 
decline in ORIT prestige in Latin America. 
More fundamental, perhaps, has he^n the 
tendency of ORIT to support US government 
policy in Latin America* ORIT endorsed the 
overthrow of the Arbenz regime in Guatemala 
and of the Goulart regime in Brazil, It 
supported Burnham over Cheddi Jagan in 
Guyana* and it approved the U,S, interven- 
tion in the Dominican Republic. To many 
Latin Americans, this looks like ORIT is 
an instrument of the U.S. State Department. 

Romualdi's work in ORIT is currently sustained 
by Andrew McLellan who, according to Dan Kurzman in 
The NEW REPUBLIC, Jane, 1&66, has risen "to his 
present important position despite a limited trade 
union background. This is regarded by some AFL^ 
CIO colleagues as more the result of ties with 
certain government agencies than of his labor 

Under the Covers 

experience," McLellan, the Inter-American repre- 
sentative and AFL-CIO delegate to ORIT, finds his 
measure of recognition, too, in "Who's Who in the 
CIA" on page 351: "from 1951 work for CIA." 

By 1961, internal eruptions and divisions 
made it difficult for ORIT to retain the appear- 
ance of independence and continue to reflect the 
Lovestone-Meany policy. Discussions began which 
led to the development of the American Institute 
for Free Labor Development (AIFLD) as a prop and 
organizing tool to sustain the ORIT unions. 


AIFLD has functioned successfully to increase 
AFL-CIO dominance of the Latin American labor 
movement. The Institute boasts of having trained 
133*755 trade unionists by 1972. Of these, 1,092 
people were put through their paces at the tightly 
guarded Little Anti-Red Schoolhouse in Front Royal* 
Virginia* and then sent home to work out the rest 
of their year- long stipend. In addition to the 
regulars, an unspecified number of Latin Americans 
have been brought to this country and given a 
grand tour of the benefits of "bread-and-butter" 
trade unionism* During these tours, one of the 
favorite stops has been Delano. California, where 
AIFLD attempts to use the struggle of the United 
Farm Workers Union as its very own showplace. 
[AIFLD Memo reprinted in El Siglo, Aug, 17*1971 J 

While ORIT is viewed in Latin America and 
the Caribbean as a tool of U*S. foreign policy, 
AIFLD has cut a deep swath of influence in affairs 
south of the Rio Grande, Subsidized bountifully 
by the State Department, it has been able to buy 
many more supporters than could be reached in the 
past, AIFLD has obtained everything money could 
buy toward creating a docile, subservient labor 
movement and* in so doing, has proved the magne- 
tic persuasive capacity of the Yanqui dollar* 


Under the Covers 


A fair number of AIFLD personnel was re- 
cruited from among Cuban supporters of dictator 
Fulgencio Batista. The AFL-CIO policy in Cuba 
was pushed by Romualdi r who supported the union 
element aligned with Batista, and Batista offered 
the Cuban Workers Federation fCTCj the "right" to 
exist in return for neutralizing the organizing 
efforts of working people to end the dictatorship, 

Eusabio Mujal, leader of CTC, was Romualdi" s 
man. By supporting inaction against Batista, they 
supported "mass murder {50,000) r complete political 
repression, government press censorship, the out- 
lawing of political parties and any trade unions 
which failed to knuckle under. When the CTC rank- 
and-file called for strike action, Mujal suspended 
union elections, removed opposition members from 
office, declared strikes illegal and arranged with 
Batista for a new checkoff system. By government 
decree, union dues were to be paid to the national 
CTC office instead of to the local unions. 

When Romualdi could not make a deal with 
Fidel Castro, he praised the "non^political char- 
acter 1 * of the CTC. The Castro forces then ter- . 
minated the Batista regime and forced Batista* a 
collaborators out of CTC. With those expulsions, 
CTC was put into the hands of its members, thereby 
losing its standing as "free and democratic 11 in 
the eyes of the AFL-CIO* 


In Guatemala in 1954, Jacobo Arbenz, elected 
with solid labor support, started a program of 
land reform which threatened the interests of 
United Fruit Company (later to become a corporate 
member of AIFJLD) . Romualdi tried to organize a 
dual union to break the solidarity of Arbenz' s 
labor support. This foreign interference was re- 
jected by the unions and the government, con vine- 

Under the Covers 


ing George Me any that it was time to "break the 
shackles of Communist domination," [ I n ter- Ameri - 
can Labor Bulletin, April 1954.] Members of the 
unsuccessful dual union joined forces with a CIA 
"liberation army*' under Col* Carlos Castillo 
Armas which toppled the Arbenz government. (How- 
ard Hunt of Watergate fame made mention of his 
CIA involvement in Guatemala while testifying 
before the Ervin committee,) Immediately after 
the coup, Romualdi arrived to help the unions 
"reorganize their forces." He stayed two months 
and left praising the Armas regime; "The people 
of Guatemala were solidly behind Castillo Armas 
and a strong wave of an ti- communism was sweeping 
the country," George Meany announced that the 
AFL "rejoices over the downfall of the Communist 
controlled regime," Castillo Armas received 
massive economic and military aid from our tax 
money and instituted a bloody repression, shack- 
ling absolute control over the unions, 

Emil Mazey of the UAW was one of the few 
men in U.S. labor who voiced oppositions 

The State Department and the United 

Fruit Company have been manipulating the 
polities of that country [Guatemala] , . . 
They have organized revolutions. .. They have 
opposed land reform. They have opposed any 
special progress for the people.., I say we 
have got to change this foreign policy of 
ours. We have got to stop measuring our 
foreign policy on what's good for American 
business that has money invested in South 
America and elsewhere in the world. 
[CIO Executive Board Meeting, June 29, 1954.] 


In Guyana (formerly British Guiana) t AIFLD 
financed some of its graduates for a longer**than- 
usual period in order to strengthen a company 
union in pulling off a completely political strike 
and lockout to oust Cheddi Jagan from leadership. 


Under the Covers 

Jag an was twice elected president despite AFL-CIO 
efforts. He was finally defeated in the chaos 
brought about by the CIA, using AFL-CIO unions as 
a front fox intervention, Arnold Zander of AFSCME 
publicly admitted using his union as a CIA funnel 
in the operation* His man in British Guiana was 
Howard McCabe, described in the April 23, 1967 
London TIMES as a man who "appears in fact to 
have been a CIA operative," He received "at 
least 15 0,000 pounds (approximately $450,000) n 
which reached Zander's office to finance a 
"wholly political" work stoppage. Government con- 
trol of unions and the use of political strikes 
are - according to AIFLD doctrine - the trademark 
of those unions which fall beyond the pale of 
"free and democratic." 


At the end of the dictatorship of General 
?rujillo in the Dominican Republic in 1362, AFL- 
CIO heavyweights went into action* Andrew McLel- 
lan and Fred Sommerford set themselves up as 
"advisers" to the newly formed United Workers for 
Free Unions (FOUPSA). When FOUPSA leader Miguel 
Soto contemplated a general strike, McLellan of- 
fered him $30,000 to call it off, Soto refused 
the money and thereafter was labeled a communist 
by the AFL-CIO representatives. McLellan and 
Sommerford then used the money to split several 
unions off from FOUPSA, establishing a small dual 
union, CGNATRAL. [Ronald Radosh, "Labor and U.S. 
Foreign Policy, p. 405.]" 

They used CQNATRAL to fight the "communist" 
majority of the Dominican labor movement* When 
FOUPSA supported liberal Juan Bosch, CONATRAL sup- 
ported the Cabral regime which overthrew him by a 
military coup. The Bosch government had been the 
first in Dominican history to recognize the major- 
ity union in every factory as legal bargaining 
agent, Cabral, on the other hand, froze wages, 
outlawed strikes, fired militant workers and 

Under the Covers 


arrested uncooperative labor leaders - and pinned 
a medal on the chest of Serafino Romualdi. Cabral 
credited U.S. unions with the "defense of freedom 
in the Dominican Republic" and with transforming 
"into free democratic trade unions what had been 
a slave labor movement*" [Romualdi, "Presidents 
and Peons," pp. 402-3.] In the street fighting 
that broke out based on the split in the labor 
movement/ the overwhelming majority of workers 
participated in a demonstration at which effigies 
of McLellan and Sommerford were burned. Sommer- 
ford, incidentally, is .listed in "Who's Who in 
the CIA" on page 489 as "1950-1965 work for CIA? 
1956 Chief of Central American Section, Informa- 
tion Service of Department of State," 

COfifATRAL called for military action against 
the Bosch government and was the only union which 
supported the intervention of U.S. troops. The 
Johnson troop intervention in 1965 was later 
proved to be based on completely false informa- 
tion ,- at no time was any evidence of Communist 
activity shown. In fact, FOUPSA [the "communist 
dominated" enemy unions) had, by that time, be- 
come part of the Christian Trade Union Movement 
(CLASC) , In 1965 COftATRAL declined in strength 
from an estimated 100,000 to 25 r 000 members. 

A little known AIFLD "Emergency Plan for the 
Dominican Republic" of November 15, 19 65 (confi- 
dential memo to State Department requesting funds) 
reveals the organizational point of view and modus 
operandi. Preparation of the plan included "the 
ORIT representative. . -all AIFLD personnel in the 
Dominican Republic, . . the U.S. Ambassador, . * The 
Executive Committee of CONATRAL , the AID Director 
and the Labor Attache. . . the Ambassador and the 
AID Mission Director have pledged their support 
for our request of $50,000 for this emergency 
program. . . ■ The plan called for a stepped-up 
propaganda and education campaign in addition 
to motorized vigilante brigades: ™3) Organizing 
campaigns in all regions- by educator-organizers 
which will be supplemented by a specially trained 


Under the Covers 

mobile group of Educator-organisers 1 for emer- 
gency situations. These will be used to confront 
and battle the 'goon squads' of the extreme left 
forces. 4) An increase in means of transporta- 
tion, i.e., jeeps t for the educators.,," 

The reason for planning such extreme measures 
was because "CGNATRAI has been identified as a 
Yankee-sponsored organisation, and under present 
conditions this makes the organization ineffective 

This plan was typical of operations in other 
Latin and Caribbean countries- The AIFLD, as a 
"private 11 organization, was able to use immense 
backing from the State Department for the deepest 
possible intervention in the affairs of a nation. 
Our government, by itself, could never get away 
with such activities out in the open; it would be 
in violation of agreements with OAS and the United 
Nations* If such intervention occurred without 
using AIFLD as a front organization, the U.S. 
would become a self-confessed international gang- 
ster. The State Department has preferred the 
path of hypocrisy paved by the AFL-CXQ, 


Over all, AIFLD follows a policy laid down 
by its director, William c. Doherty, Jr., in a 
speech in 1966 1 l1 The key question of our time is 
the future road of their (Latin American) revolu- 
tion: toward Communist totalitarianism or toward 
democracy. For the American labor movement this 
is one of the paramount, pivotal issues; all other 
questions, . .must remain secondary. H This doctrine 
pushes all the issues of primary importance to 
working people to the background. What happens 
to wages, working conditions, living conditions 
and union recognition when the No. 1 issue is 
anti-communism? This doctrine is the single 
factor responsible for AIFLD support of the bru- 
tal dictatorships of Latin America which have 
destroyed the various national labor movements 
through ]ails and terror, it is a betrayal of 

Under the Covers 

working people when we sanction any regime that 
permits AFL-CIO-oriented 1, anti- communist" unions 
to function at a minimum level of activity while 
bringing an iron fist down on all other social 
and economic action. 

Even George Meany stated in October, 1969: 

"We sincerely believe that the extension of dic- 
tatorship - anywhere - which is always accompan- 
ied by the destruction of free unions, represents 
a threat to freedom everywhere in the world. 
Within this principle, AIFLD narrowly defines a 
"free union" as one which will take both money 
from AIFLD and orders from Washington. By a 
perverted definition - and the one now practiced 
- any government which permits such a union is 
not a dictatorship and not a threat. This [jus- 
tifies AFL^CIO acceptance of the dictatorship in 
\ Brazil, and virtual silence when the hatchetmen 

in Chile outlaw the left-oriented labor movement 
and murder the militants. 


Reading through the AIFLD Report offers an 
unusual view of the organisation. The monthly 
house organ is a poorly edited reflection of 
paranoid an ti -communism. The journalistic level 
fails to reach even that of the average high 
school newspaper. The only social or political 
issue to appear in any of the Reports between 
1969 and 1973 is that of an ti- communism. At no 
point is there any indication of any strike boy- 
cott or other labor struggle; if, indeed, the 
AIFLD touches even "bread-and-butter conflicts, 
it is not indicated. There is very little real 
information to be found between the constantly 
overblown reports on the success of the various 
social projects and training programs. One piece 
of useful information given is that the cost ot 
AIFLD programs through 1973 comes to 54 3 million. 


Under the Covers 

The August 1973 REPORT offers a rare insiahc 
as to how far the visIolToT a communist bU™ ' 
can go to distort one's consciousness, xht Bra- 
zilian military dictatorship, which Doherty ooenlv 
admits was aided in its coup by AIFLD, ha become* 
notorious for its broad use of torture against 
political prisoners and a policy of genocide 
against its native Indian population^nd mlny 
effective dissenters. There are severe anci- 
™ ■£,,*' f ages are controlled at the lowest 
beln^eci^tedV"* *$* H*« l««*«hip has m ? ;" an anti-oommunist" drive. 
Heloio Magheaani, an AIFLD trustee and director 
of Brazil's Workers Cultural Institute (ict^ has 

allSSin ar ^ ClS in , the iSSUe - With »«* one wird 
alluding to any of the above described crises 

he claims that his ICT is making an "effective 
contribution to the Brazilian llbor movement in 
Pendent and^mf i *:-' int0 • responsib^^nde- 

?re n m: n c a « d to e ™°" e tl u C s m Sr?ST' S "an?? ^ ?*' 
and acceptance of TzzT-lll dogma i " I ts™phUo- 
IttLtLlT^^f 1 dem -"=y 9 and oeterrence'or 
reeimgs of the Brazilian people. » an v™, h»»» 
an echo from the labor front ItkiilM* Germany?" 

to a rarforofi?^/" 2 T° R ?-' we *™ treated 
tlJL £? P rof ile of one of AIFLD' s operatives 

Aren't iL Way i the dy "? n,ic di «ctor of P AI?LD in' 
Argentina. Here are his credentials in l „h«t 

graduaretfrom M lw J ioB ' "• '• «^JE"»d 
Busine^T k Northwestern University School of 

b^v 5 Av was a rnember of the First National 
?«£ ot S hlc ^° T rust Department; 1954-56? g?aff 

tSftSfTS* 6 i" the Mr F °"^ then went Into 
the state Department as a foreign service officer 
became vice-consul to Brazil th*„ .*.« orricer, 
ant to the Assistant Secretary^f Sratlf^ H T 8 v" 

loan Affairs, and - fro^hat „ Ld f K ' 
position, entered the AIFLD. It i^t.rtlifi 
that such a ™an would be given a }L>or posUion 

Under the Covers 


but more amazing is that AIFLD publicly boasts 

about him. 

Leafing through issue after issue of the AIFLD 
REPORT t one is bound to get an impression that all 
developments in Latin American trade unions revolve 
around three individuals. The publication consis- 
tently uses photos of Doherty, Meany and Joe Bierne 
of the Communications Workers to break up the in- 
evitably boring filler material. The eunuch- Tike 
face of Doherty is always smiling, perhaps because 
he expects that repeated publication of his 
bosses 1 snapshots will keep them from questioning 
the quality of the publication, Doherty T s dimi- 
nished capacity to obtain quality journalism in 
his house organ is an embarrassment to union mem- 
bers. It must be especially degrading to members 
of the Newspaper Guild* 

The June, 19 72 issue is filled with tenth 
anniversary greetings to AIFLD. There are SO 
greetings in all, and no indication that any were 
omitted. Surprisingly - of the 80 - 29 messages 
were sent from one of the smallest Latin American 
nations, Uruguay, which has been under a long 
totalitarian state of siege* Oth^i greetings of 
interest are from Kelson Rockefeller and from 
Chile. The latter marks the last time Chile is 
mentioned at all until the junta terminated the 
Allende government in September 1973. This con- 
trasts with AIFLD REPORTS previous to June '72 
which contain perfunctory notes on progress in 
Chile in almost every issue. 

The October 1969 REPORT carries a profile of 
Robert J, O'Neill, program director for Chile. 
The cosmetically touched-up picture is of the man 
who represented AIFLD until the junta took over 
the government. O'Neill ia an intelligent writer 
who took up law after becoming an officer in the 
American Association of Catholic Trade Unionists 
before joining AIFLD's staff. O'Neill complains, 
"There are still unfounded charge a that AIFLD 
teaches a brand of sweetheart contract unionism 



Under the Covers 

or company unionism. . . ■ He also protests too 
much that "the role of AlFLD/Chile is not to 
teach our brand of trade unionism, nor is it 
to teach or support our economic system," Either 
this shows a growing sophistication or it is in 
?^i ete contradiction to the past practices of 
AIFLD, one item in his article gives the lie to 
his denial of company unionism. Strangely in- 
cluded in O'Neill's description of AIPLD train- 
i^ CO w rses is on * listed as "Time and Motion 
utuay. Most trade unionists know that the time- 
and-motion engineer is the company man with the 

SrS- °!} takes notes on workers ' movements 
ro imd new speed-up methods. The workers in a 
shop lose no love on the time-and-motion engineer, 
would any union but a company union promote time- 
an d-motion s tudi e s ? 


Analyzing the role of O'Neill and AIFLD in 
the overthrow of the Allende government of Chile 
may be somewhat premature. There is not much 
hard information to date. We will review what we 
can, beginning with AIFLD 's first venture in Chile 

The first entrance to Chile by AIPLD is de- 
scribed in "Chile Invadido* by Eduardo Labarca 
Godard, published in Santiago: Editor a Austral, 
196 8. None other than William C. Doner ty, Jr 
led a delegation to Chile in 1962; he met with 
labor leaders in the Pan American Hotel and of- 
fered loans for cooperatives, housing and small 

i™ C ",?f° gramS \ Labarc a says Doherty's moves 
were like a tank that opens the way for the in- 
fantry. Next came John Snyder and Ester Cantu. 
ineir object was to organize telephone workers 
away from the militant Union of Telephone £m- 

llver^T T ^ y ^° Pen ? d tt ° ffice in s ^tiago, were 
given a list of employees by the company, and 
launched a campaign of wining and dining. Those 
?™n5 r J„ f ld ^'t buy the line and had influence 
found themselves fired for various reasons. When 


Under the Covers 


Doherty's people won the next union election, the 
company saw to it that the former militant lead- 
ers no longer had jobs in the industry. To the 
credit of the workers, by 196 7 the situation was 
reversed and the company once more had to deal 
with militant union representatives. 

On a larger scale, AIFLD employed the dual 
union tactic used- in so many other countries, in 
19 6 2 AFL-CIO representative Morris Paladino went 
to Chile to make a deal with Jose Goldsack, a 
leader of the minority Christian Democrat faction 
of the Central Confederation of Workers [CUT). 
The tactic was to split the CUT convention. The 
tiny National Confederation of Workers (CNT) and 
its largest member, the Maritime Confederation of 
Chile (COMACH) were to demand admission to the 
CUT convention, Paladino was to supply all back 
dues; if they were denied entry, it was to sig- 
nal a mass withdrawal of the minority of Christian 
Democrats and Paladino would pay the rent on a new 
hall and the first expenses of a new labor federa- 
tion devoid of leftists. The plan fell through. 
Goldsack sacked the gold and the Christian Demo- 
crats backed out. The dual union deal is de- 
tailed by Serafino Romualdi in his book, "Presi- 
dents and Peons, 11 pp. 345-354. 

The main forces in CUT were leftists of sev- 
eral varieties, They held their own against 
AIFLD and became the strongest political force in 


-.,.. Throu ^ h t* 1 * sixties, AIFLD had unusual 
difficulty in Chile for several reasons, The 
Christian Democratic minority of unions kept 
vacillating in its alliances. Open collaboration 
with U.S. money was unthinkable; it would invite 
rejection by the rank-and-file. The long and 
militant history of organized labor in Chile 
placed economic exploitations by American com- 
panies high in the consciousness of the workers* 


Under the Covers 

CUT presented a militant program and had the 
strength to win immediate gains while keeping an 
eye on a socialist future. This kept AIFLD at 
bay, especially after 19 70 when CUT - as part of 
the Popular Unity - elected Allende president- ■ 
Then, for the first time in Chilean history, 
CUT made political gains in the bi-elections. 
Continuing to spout the standard AIFLD line to 
CUT workers was like talking to a copper- lined 

The situation accounted for the sophisticated 
deviations of Robert O'Neill, in his AIFLD arti- 
cle, he dared to disown simple "bread-and-butter" 
unionism, it must have become clear to him that, 
in a nation where there was not enough bread for 
the working people, they - would not be persuaded 
by talking about butter, Chile's history as a 
democracy is longer than that of any other Latin 
American country. in that setting, the radical 
actions of the labor movement had made a deep im- 
pression, proving to the satisfaction of the 
majority of working people and peasants that their 
only answer was in ridding Chile of foreign econo- 
mic domination and taking social control of indus- 
trial and farm production. There was no doubt 
among Chile's working people that there were more 
solutions to be found in political action than in 
"bread-and-butter 11 collective bargaining by itself. 

From a Chilean worker's viewpoint , reliance 
on "bread-and-butter" collective bargaining alone 
could, at best, give him a few more crumbs from a 
pie that was already divided. The multinational 
companies which dominate the extractive and com- 
munications industries have historically grabbed 
off the largest slice of the pie - long before 
any collective bargaining took place. The work- 
ing peoples * only hope for reaching a sufficient 
and growing balanced economy was to shake off the 
grip of the multinational corporations and the 
paid-off politicians and oligarchs who benefited 
from the status quo. If this were not true, when 


Under the Covers 


Allende finally nationalised the copper companies 
he never could have received the unanimous sup- 
port of an otherwise divided and conservative 


With the election of Allende, tensions grew 
between Chile and the U.S. State Department. Most 
credits and economic aid were cut off - with two 
exceptions; U.S. military aid and training pro- 
grams continued to the tune of $12 million. 
Though Allende controlled the executive branch of 
the government, the military operated with a cer- 
tain amount of independence* Judging by the 
events of September 11, 19 73, the $12 million was 
a fine business investment for the expropriated 
U.S. copper companies. The other exception was 
SI million of AID money set aside for "technical 
assistance." Much of this was for the continued 
operation of AIFLD, which receives 92% of its 
funds from AID. 

Robert O'Neill tells us that, through October 
of 1369, 5,96 3 Chileans had participated in 
AIFLD seminars in Chile. It is impossible to tell 
whether or not the figures are based on reality or 
puffery, but the 19 72 ten-year report of AIFLD 
puts the Chile seminar total at 8,337. Between 
19 69 and 19 72, the continuing seminars involved 
2,877 more people. 

The ten-year report states that 79 Chileans 
were graduates of the AIFLD school at Front Royal, 
Virginia* A memorandum from AIFLD T s Washington 
office dated 2/2E/73 lists the names of the Front 
Jftoyal graduates from Chile; there are a total of 
10 8, indicating 29 graduates in a six-month span, 
opposed to 79 in a ten-year period* For a reason 
never explained or mentioned in public AIFLD re- 
ports, O'Neill's staff suddenly went into high 
gear in the short time prior to the coup. There 
is a difference between including "time-and- 
motion" in a course for trade unionists and speed- 
ing up student turnout by 400%! 



Under the Covers 

The speed-up of "education" activity multi- 
plied AIFLD contacts and information* They were, 
at the time of the coup, well prepared to offer 
the generals detailed information on the where- 
abouts and activities of trade union leaders at 
all levels. The junta has been using that sort 
of information for the selective massacre of trade 
unionists who had been effective supporters of the 
Aliende government. The evidence that AIFLD Chile 
files were used in this manner is only circum- 

On January 6 t 1974 the Washington POST car- 
ried an in-depth article describing the connec- 
tions and similarities between the Brazilian coup 
and recent events in Chile. The primary Brazilian 
adviser to the Chileans who plotted against the 
Aliende government was Dr. Glycon de Paiva, He 
recommended to his Chilean counterparts that they 
" create an intelligence system to study the actions 
of all key people and movements." dePaiva advised 
using Chile's professional organizations and said, 
"Only after you have established the central in- 
formation banks, anti government actions can be 
properly prepared and coordinated, " Other cir- 
cumstances pointing toward AIFLD complicity are 
the friendly attitude the junta displays toward 
unions connected with AIFLD, while other union 
activity is outlawed. 


Also we get some clues to the reason for the 
speed-up in activity from the multinational cor- 
poration chairman of AIFLD: "The AIFLD urges co- 
operation between labor and management and an end 
to class struggle. It teaches workers to help in- 
crease their company's business- . .promote demo- 
cratic free trade unions; to prevent communist 
infiltration, and where it already exists to get 
rid of it," (Address by 0, Peter Grace, AIFLD 
Booklet, Sept. 16, 1965,] Salvador Aliende was 
a Marxist, the CUT was leftist, and Chile was 
viewed by ITT, the copper companies and the State 
Department as a communist menace. We can be 

Under the Covers 


certain that the State Department did not continue 
special AID funding for an AIFLD speed-up without 
specific purpose. 

Representing 600,000 workers in 1970 and two 
million by 1973, CUT was not a labor federation 
which could fit under the AIFLD definition of 
"democratic and free." Although its elections 
were democratic and it was not tied to any single 
political party, it was leftist and supported by 
the Marxist- oriented government. Through empha- 
sis on organizing the unorganized, CUT left but 
a few unions in which AIFLD could overtly make 
inroads. To determine AIFLD 1 s activities, it is 
important to know something about the people and 
the organisations it dealt with. 

The ten-year report [AIFL0-1 962-1 972, U A 
Decade of Worker to Worker Cooperati orf] says that 
the Chilean Maritime Federation (COMACH) was the 
"major labor organization with which AIFLD co- 
operates," Leaders Of COMACH were among Romu- 
aldi*s contacts and have been on AIFLD 1 s board 
of trustees since 1962- According to Jorge Kef, 
a Chilean Christian Democrat and professor of 
political science at the University of California 
at Santa Barbara , COMACH is not a typical Chilean 
union. "Its membership is largely maritime offi- 
cers, many of whom served as officers in the Navy* 
Even those without naval background spend their 
first year of training in classes with naval 
officers." The first city to fall in the Sept- 
ember 11 coup was Valparaiso at 3:00 a.m. The 
naval officers in that port city were prominent 
in the leadership of the coup, A working rela- 
tionship with the coup cannot be proved at this 
point, but there was no other reason for the un- 
usual presence of U.S« naval intelligence in Val- 
paraiso at the time* Additionally, off the coast 
of Valparaiso on September 11, 1973, U.S. vessels 
were standing by in maneuvers with the Chilean 
navy. £N.¥. TIMES, Sept. 14 t 1973.] It would 
seem that the AIFLD activity with COMACH offered 
one excellent opportunity to live up to past 
practice and doctrine by intervening to destroy 
the Aliende government. 


Under the Covers 

Several months prior to the coup a great 
deal of world publicity was given to a strike by 
copper mine employees. This occurred after the 
mines were nationalized and when the economy was 
greatly troubled by an economic blockade. Waqe 
demands were not met. The government felt that 
the wage level of the Professional Employees 
Union was far above all other workers' wages, 
and priority for increases was shown to those at 
the lowest wage level. The vast majority of pro- 
duction workers in the mines supported CUT and 
the government. Though the strike petered out, 
it served to promote the dissatisfaction used by 
the junta to justify the coup, 

_ AIFLD was especially active among elite pro- 
fessional employees i engineers, supervisors and 
executives. Through one of its "impact programs" 
it gave a $5,000 assist to the Professional Em- 
ployees Union of the Andes Mining Company; the 
money was "needed to complete a vacation colony 
at todillo Beach." [AIFLD Report , May 1370.] 
™Ji™ ch * le , was struggling with mass malnutrition 
aifld saw fit to help set up a country club, in 
contrast, one of the prouder achievements of 
Allende was a program to distribute a pint of 
mil* a day to every Chilean child. 

Though there had been professional employee 
associations for some time, in May 1971 AIFLD 
assisted the formation of the Confederation of 
Chilean Professionals (CUPROCH) f which was started 
in the copper mines but became an important nat- 
ional force when it supported the truck owners' 
and merchants' strike in October 'of 19 72 The 
former secretary general of CUPROCH says that 
tne federation was suddenly flooded with funds 
toward the end of the strike. This may account 
tor the sudden drop in the black market rate for 
hv i™S * Itcouia also account for a story 
by TIME correspondent Hudolph Bausch, who inter- 

m^l S ° m V triking tr " ck ers near Santiago one 
mealtime. Despite serious shortages, they were 
havrng a "lavish meal of steak, vegetables a^d 
empanadas." He asked them where the money for 

mi^L?*? 6 fr ? m * **%? «Plie*r "From the CIA." 
LTIHE Magazine, Sept. 24, 1973.] 

Under the Covers 


The influence of AIFLD- supported professional 
unions (CUPROCH) grew beyond anything one might 
expect* Its ability to finance largescale econo- 
mic disruption surpassed the limits of its own 
treasury by leaps and bounds. The importance of 
CUPROCH was so great that, in his last moments of 
life, Allende could not avoid reference to it. 
When bombs were falling on the Moneda, he spoke 
his last words on radio; explosions can be heard 
in the background of the recording of this broad- 
cast as allende *s voice penetrates the bombard- 
ment i 

Workers of my country, I want to thank 
you for the loyalty you have always shown, 
for the trust you have placed in a man who 
has only been the mouthpiece of the great 
aspirations of justice, who gave his word 
to respect the constitution and the law 
and was faithful to his promise... I am 
speaking to the members of the professions, 
those patriots" who a few days ago were con- 
tinuing to struggle against the revolt led 
by the professional unions . That is, the 
class unions who were trying to hold onto 
the advantages granted to a few of them by 
the capitalist society. [Emphasis added. 3 

Moments later the transmitter was destroyed and 
Allende murdered. 

In those countries where AIFLD intervention 
has aided the overthrow of governments which 

threatened the continued economic domination by 
the multinationals, it has followed a pattern, 
AIFLD tries to promote its influence in the trans- 
port and communications industries. READERS DI- 
GEST, AIFLD member and contributor, for December 
1966 carries an article describing the influence 
of AIFLD graduates in Brazil. There, graduates 
saw to it that communications workers kept the 
lines open to facilitate the military takeover, 
even though it meant scabbing on the general 
strike called by the Brazilian labor movement. 
The Washington POST of Jan* 6, 1974 quotes a 


Under the Covers 

prominent Brazilian historian, who asks to be un- 
identified, speaking of the Chilean coup: w The 
first two days I felt I was living a Xerox copy 
of Brazil, 1964," 

The list of Front Royal graduates from Chile 
shows 37 of 10 8 people from the communications 
and transport industries. Could AIFLD have 
pressed the same strategy in Chile that was so 
disastrous to the working people of Brazil? The 
results surely have been similar* 

In the memorandum list of Front Royal gradu- 
ates seven are listed as members or officers of 
the professional associations and an undetermined 
number of others are CUPROCH members, 


The organization which directed the "strike" 
of truck owners and merchants is called the Nat- 
ional Command for Gremio Defense. This organiza- 
tion was responsible for planning and executing 
Chile's internal economic chaos. it also set up 
paramilitary groups to terrorize supporters of 
the Allende government* 

The word "gremio" makes for convenient con- 
fusion in English; it is often translated as 

unxon," but actually means "guild" or "society." 
In Chile, a gremio is usually an association of 
employers s professionals or tradespeople, but it 
can include both workers and employers, "Gremio* 
embodies the AIFLD concept of labor-management 
solidarity moreso than any word in English. 

In December, 19 72 Jorge Guerrero, secretary 
of the National Command for Gremio Defense, was 
invited to attend one of the advanced courses of- 
fered by AIFLD in Washington. Because AIFLD was 
involved with many of the Gremio people in Chile, 
it is important to knew about the leading organi- 
zations and people in the National Command, in 
order of importance they are: 

Confederation of Production and Commerce. 
Jorge Fontaine, president, comes from one of the 
wealthiest oligarch families, He was once pub- 
licly associated with the Nazi movement. 

Under the Covers 


Society of Manufacturers , Orlando Saenz, 
president, is reputed to be the brain behind the 
National Command for Gremio Defense; served as 
liaison with the U.S. Embassy and was a secret 
director of Fatria y Liber tad (Fascist-like para- 
military organization) , 

National Society of Agriculture, Manuel 
Valdes represented this group on a post- coup in- 
ternational good will publicity tour. He is presi- 
dent of the Confederation of Unions of Agricultural 
Employers (COSEMACH) . This was the key organisa- 
tion in setting up roadblocks to prevent land re- 
form even before Allende* s election, COSEMACH led 
the economic disruption* A man most important in 
the establishment of COSEMACH was William Thayer, 
AIFLD trustee. The past president of the National 
Society of Agriculture, Benjamin Matte t was also a 
director of Patria y Libertad who openly advocated 
mass murder of all foreigners and communists. 

Chamber of Construction. Hugo Leon, pre- 
sident; "We will carry all our forces to an enor 
mouB strike and not give in until the Armed Forces 
intervene and Allende is finished." The Chamber 
is comprised 3f the largest construction companies 
with votes allotted according to size of company* 
Chamber companies halted construction on low- cost 
housing and then locked out workers during the 
pre-coup "strikes.* In some cases, they paid 
double wages to keep workers off the job* 

Chamber of Commerce. Jorge Martinez; or- 
ganized and coordinated black market activities 
through the organizational control of 70% of whole- 
sale distribution. 

Central Work Confederation. This group 
has the same initials in Spanish as CUT, the laboi 
federation which backed Allende. The initials are 
designed to create confusion, both in Chile and 
the world press. This paper confederation was set 
up after the Sept. 11 coup and after the junta 
outlawed the two million member CUT. Central work 
Confederation is a "union" of businessmen which 
claims to be open to labor and management "equally 
Its founder, Leon Vilarin, is also president of 


Under the Covers 

the National Command for Gremio Defense? he was 
president of the Confederation of Truck Owners 
of Chile, although he does not own a truck, and 
though now organizing a "workers confederation," 
he is not a worker. These contradictions are of 
little importance in his relationship with AIFLD; 
the formation of this group closely parallels 
AIFLD actions in other Latin American countries. 

Central Confederation of Chilean Pro- 
fessionals ( CUP ROCH). Julio Bazan, presi den t,be longs 
to one of the oldest aristocratic families. He 
takes home 57,000 a month as a mining engineer. 
"No one has the right to deny me a carpeted house 
and a furnished patio..* It now seems inevitable 
that an authoritarian government will have to be 
imposed on Chile... such a government will rely on 
a combination of the armed forces and the trained 
educated elite. ..the only possibility of a right 
wing government would involve a massive massacre 
of communists and members of the Movement of the 
Revolutionary Left (MIR) , " AIFLD was deeply in- 
volved with the groups which comprise this con- 
federation, as evidenced by the composition of 
Front Royal graduates and assistance to the Andes 
Mining Company professionals. 

Such are a few of the allies of AIFLD in Chile. 


The above forces, with the aid of AFL-CIG, 
will build "free and democratic* unions on the 
ashes of the left-oriented CUT and of the esti- 
mated 30,000 workers thus far slaughtered by the 
junta. All union activists who supported the 
legally elected constitutional government of Popu- 
lar Unity are now labeled as communists. Many of 
those who have not been killed have been jailed 
or forced into exile or hiding; the rest who have 
been fingered as Allende government supporters 
arc blacklisted and unable to find work. Accord- 
ing to Carlos Altimirano, former government mini- 
ster, 30,000 are imprisoned and 200,00 have been 
fired from their jobs for political reasons. 

Under the Covers 


"Free, democratic" unions will probably be 
tolerated by the junta and the government it in- 
stals as time goes on, but there will be strict 
controls. Union members will "freely elect" only 
those who meet with the approval of the govern- 
ment. The unions themselves will be "free" to 
function just so long as they keep from pressing 
any troublesome demands upon the employers, the 
government and especially the multinational cor- 
porations . 

Meanwhile, with the main body of organized 
labor outlawed, inflation has zoomed to an un- 
precedented minimum of 1100% and wages are frozen. 
The living standards for many thousands of fami- 
lies have fallen far below a starvation level. 
The press and other media are entirely in the 
hands of the junta- Curfews are in force," vio- 
lators subject to being shot on sight* Any meet- 
ings other than small family groups are violations 
of law* Dissenting political thought, organiza- 
tion and action are capital crimes . AIFLD, with 
junta sanction secured by the U.S. State Depart- 
ment and CIA, now has fertile ground in which to 
sink some roots, an opportunity riper than at any 
time in Chile's history. 

In a new development the first week of Janu- 
ary / 19 74, the junta arranged for and approved a 
meeting of 26 small AlFLD^connected unions* This 
group, the Chilean National Workers Confederation 
led by Eduardo Rojas, president of AIFLD' s prime 
client union, COMACH, claims to be the "new al^ 
ternative" to CUT. Its vice-president is Luis 
Villenas, another AIFLD graduate. The fascist 
junta knows which its "bread-and-butter" 
unionism is on, 

A recent report of labor conditions in Chile 
comes from the respected Mexico City daily, Ex- 
celsior. A subway under construction in Santiago 
was the scene of a sitdown strike against frozen 
wages and rocketing prices. "The workers went 
before the military administrator and demanded 
a salary increase. The military asked who the 

leader of the group was and all workers- raised 
their hands. Immediately an official ordered the 
soldiers to fire on all of them, , .with heavy 
machine guns* ** 80- 100 workers died*" In the 
Hirmans textile factory in Santiago, workers ver- 
bally protested on a wage issue; seven leaders 
were taken away by military intelligence and have 
not been heard from since* The I AM Machinist of 
January 10, 1974 quotes: "General Oscar Bonilla, 
the junta's interior minister, explaining the 
official attitude on strikes: 'They will not be 
necessary; the government will settle workers' 
problems. ' " 


The actions of the AFL-CIO leadership in 
foreign (especially Latin American) affairs have 
a severe impact on those of us in the rank-and- 
file of the American labor movement , Through 
alliance with the major multinationals and U.S. 
government representatives bought and paid for 
by those corporations , only one thing has been 
gained: top men in the AFL-CIO are able to sit 
down with the men who run our government and deal 
as junior partners* This amounts to less than 
nothing at all on the paychecks or in the dignity 
of the working people of our country* In exchange 
for such favors, our name is used as a front for 
the State Department and the CIA, whose invisible 
tentacles wrap around the vital functioning parts 
of the labor movement. 

As we act through AIFLD to support and sus^ 
tain the most right-wing elements of labor through- 
out the world, we become labor relations experts 
for the very corporations that squeeze us every 
day on the job here at home* And what self-res- 
pecting i true labor representative can be found 
who would accept domination from outside his own 
union? None of us would want that in our local. 
When we elect a man to office, we expect him to 
represent the members - not some well-heeled CIA- 
union bureaucrat with a fat wallet and fancy 
promises dreamed up in a corporate boardroom* 

Under the Covers 


We have permitted our unions to become per- 
verted by the dogma of anti- communism to the point 
where we support clearly fascist governments* By 
supporting such governments as those of Guatemala, 
the Dominican Republic, Uruguay, Brawl and Chile, 
we are supporting the very people who murder and 
iail our most loyal union brothers and sisters. 
In the name of anti -communism, we have P^ced our- 
selves in the hands of bureaucrats who label as 
"communist" any threat to their own power. (In 
the government-controlled press of present-day 
Chile, even TIME Magazine and Ted Kennedy are 
"agents of the world-wide communist conspiracy. ) 

Since when is an honest trade unionist 
afraid of a communist or anyone else? We re used 
to all kinds of differences of opinion — you put 
it before the membership , argue about it, and vote 

Virulent anti- communism led cur overseas 
representatives into dual unionism, ^^L^* 
strikebreaking in defense of "free and democratic 
unions. Once down that road, it was °?ft * *™£~ 
step or two out of the way to become willing work 
ers for the CIA. How workers in other countries 
find it impossible to know the difference between 
the AFL-ClS and the CIA, and the term '^L-CIA 
has become a standard joke that is never funny. 

Once involved with the CIA, the CIA was in- 
volved with us. With the CIA operating in the 
labor unions, we turned upon pelves. J**™* 
nf Dushina for organization of the unorganizea, 
we sauted "comS^ist" at those unions which would 
not buy U.S. foreign policy without asking que s- 
tions: In place of action to end all discrimina- 
tion In ou/unions, we kicked out those jnion- 
fiahtina hardest against discrimination and caiiea 
them "rid." Insteld of strengthening our ties 
with unions around the world in *rder to deal 
with the rising conglomerates and ™ltinational 
corporations, we split international labor groups . 
We put our arm around the boss' shoulder and it 
was "Yes, sir, brother I" We went world wide in 


Under the Covers 

search of a "free, democratic, bread-and-butter 
labor movement" which would accept y.s. State De- 
partment policy and keep its mouth shut while the 
boss was talking. All the time, whoever stood in 
the way of the corporate financial status quo was 
a "communx 5 t f " from the liberal Juan Boscn and* 

tht r™ hol ! c t u 2 1 2 nS t0 the Socialist Allende and 
the Communist Fidel Castro* 



Meanwhile, in our own backyard our corporate 
and government "allies" dropped the Taft-Hartlev 

tZ^Tr °^ necJ ^ and winched it firm with 
rihT lflf J n the time Pushing to pass 
right- to-work. AFL-CIO collaboration with busi- 
ness and government set the scene for Meany's 
willing acceptance of a place for labor on Nixon's 

saf™ ^ 01 b ° ard - ° Ur ^ * aid official have 
sat on these government- corporate- labor bodies 
Helping to decide how much is to be ripped off 
our paychecks after negotiations. Instead of 
outlawing strikes, the Nixon government uses 
™?™? ^1? to legitimise a new totalitarian 
control of collective bargaining. Our officials' 

^"i J^herence to State Department policy 
pushed the AFL-CIO out front for the Indo-China 
war. when we, the American people, demonstrated 
llr ^A lli ° ns against the war, the head of the 
Z^~±l f houted "traitors and kooks and commies," 
And the Amencan people, whose pressure brought 
o?h^r ^L tr ?? PS an ?. sto PP^ the bombing, are none 
other than the working people of this country who 
paid for that war and lost our children We 
and SX-J men v aitd women * nd our daughters and sons 
?n^ ^ /° rJ ? e ^ S just wai ting to bl organized. 
Instead of joining with the American people in 

' ^ E ^!f *°™s ^ F^ce and the continuing 

take a S??™* r ^ 1Sm ' We HaVe seen our "l^ders" 
mS ™f ™ ^ n th€ corner Of the boardroom while 
^l^ n ^n the T TS ' the *«™»«tt Coppers and 
Standard Oils and united Fruits work out a policy 
of "cooperation and consensus." policy 

Under the Covers 



That consensus for labor-management- govern- 
ment collaboration is institutionalised in AIFLD. 
Labor willingly stays out in front to pacify the 
organizations of working people in Latin America, 
allowing continued multinational corporation dom- 
ination of those unfortunate national economies. 
We work hand- in-hand with the "dirty tricks" de- 
partment of the executive branch and the CIA, 
fastening down military dictatorships which are 
economically and militarily indebted to the U.S* 
for their very existence* Our government then 
supplies these dictatorships with the technical 
assistance and materiel to keep their miserable, 
poor working people in line. 

On the way toward fulfilling this job, 
aipld buys off union officials with trips and 
paychecks and, where necessary to fulfil politi- 
cal goals, provides limited high-cost housing, 
service centers and the like. Our officials boast 
of these things as humanitarian efforts, they pat 
each other on the back, and exchange awards at 
banquets. They may offer the people a carrot and 
stick, but the people of Latin America are not 
donkeys. They see us as the Yankee medicine men 
handing out two-cent aspirins to supposedly cure 
a pestilence of poverty. When they can no longer 
bear the burden, their will to change their situ- 
ation must erupt. Our government will, at a 
point, not be able to trust the dirty work to the 
Pinochets of Chile or to a Castillo Armas of 
Guatemala. We will once more "have to" send in 
the Marines or Green Berets, and we will have 
created a continent- wide Vietnam in the Western 

In the meantime, the 95 corporations behind 
AIFLD will rake in all profits the market will 
bear, When our demands for wages and conditions 
are higher than they want to pay, the multinational 


Under the Covers 

runaway shops will have a southern continent 
full of low- wage workers hungry for jobs. The 
contagion of poverty in Latin America will spread 
north* Those manufactured goods still produced 
in this country will go begging for a southern 
market and there will be none, because the very 
wealthy few who control the Latin American nations 
cannot consume enough to keep our assembly lines 


The Latin American working people need ex- 
actly what we union members need: to be per- 
mitted to work out their own destinies in soci- 
eties shaped by themselves- We wouldn't tolerate 

intervention in our lives by Latin American gov- 
ernments — how can we expect them to accept 

interference from us? 

If we want to do justice to our sisters and 
brothers in Latin America, we have to leave them 
alone to develop their urn ion structures and their 
governments according to their own choices within 
the dynamics of their own societies. The people 
of Latin America need the chance to develop bal- 
anced economies which are not open to the absurd 
profiteering of the multinationals. When they 
move to control their own economies r they don't 
need any more Nixon economic blockades r and they 
don't need the AFL-CIO raising the curtain for 
anymore military takeovers. 

The withdrawal of AIFLD from service as the 
advanceroen for company unions suitable to the 
major corporations is the first step. If Chile 
had been allowed to work out her own problems 
without inter ference, we would have plants work- 
ing now turning out machine tools for new indus- 
tries. Her people would supply an expanding mar- 
ket for our consumer goods. Our giant copper 
companies would have to deal straight with U,S, 
copper miners and come a hell of a lot closer to 

Under the Covers 47 

meeting their economic demands. They would not 
have the option of switching production beyond 
our southern border in order to hold down pay- 
rolls here at home. 

There are other considerations, too, which 
demand an end to the practices of AIFLE. We can- 
not keep giving our blessing to dirty trick CIA 
efforts to replace democratically elected govern- 
ments with fascist type dictatorships. The CIA 
has operated inside and alongside AIFLD without 
any supervision from our own representatives in 
Congress. It has been beyond any democratic 
regulation. It is now impossible to measure the 
extent of CIA influence either in the labor move- 
ment or the U.S. government. It is not reason- 
able to expect the CIA to have scruples in deal- 
ing with the American people. This group of men 
takes on the god- like power to create fascist 
overthrows in Latin America and is not answerable 
to us. We have no control over the CIA through 
either the processes of government or our trade 
union organisations. Our labor movement has no 
means of control over the CIA; even the U.S* Con- 
gress , despite occasional but persistent efforts 
to investigate or control the CIA, has failed, 

There is no one who can say that a day will 
not come when those invisible CIA forces feel so 
threatened by the American people and by our own 
labor movement that they openly turn on us. What 
happens if a nervous Nixon is impeached and won't 
move out of the White House? Does he send his 
executive dirty tricks department out for the 
"mission impossible n folks in the home organiza- 
tion - the CIA? It takes no far stretch of imag- 
ination to envision our labor movement and our 
people caught in the same vise that was used in 
Chile, and with the same men turning the screw* 


Under the Covers 


The hypocrisy of AIFLD calls for free, demo- 
cratic trade unions to oppose totalitarianism* In 
every crisis the lushly payrolled fighters for 
these "free, democratic" unions invoke the armed 
force of totalitarian government to enforce con- 
trol, Bven without crises r what kind of democracy 
is it when a completely alien force can enter a 
union, select a spokesman and supply him with un- 
limited technical help and money? The democratic 
choice of the rank-and-file is replaced by the 
outside moneybags* All the rhetoric of AIFLD 
cannot hide the absurd hypocrisy in its abuse of 
" f reedom and d emo c r acy * " 

The very first meetings in which AIFLD was 
formed characterized its future. On October 11, 
1962 , a Project Review Committee was set up to 
"coordinate activities*' 1 In addition to Joe 
Beirne and his protege, William C, Doherty, Jr. , 
the key man was Edward Powell r listed as a CIA 
agent, ["Who's Who in the CIA," p. 449,] The 
earliest strategy was to control the Latin Ameri- 
can and Caribbean societies via two elements; 
the labor movements with AIFLD, and the military 
with Pentagon cash and equipment. This has. been 
the pattern in every national crisis situation. 
Both control levers have had more than ample 
lubrication by the CIA, It is a fact that the 
CIA helps to determine the strategy of labor. 
We cannot say that labor determines any strategy 
for the CIAi Each national crisis has been 
temporarily resolved by putting the military in 
charge of government and AIFLD organizations in 
charge of a "de-politicized" labor movement. 

These maneuvers prove beyond any doubt the 
enormous power and potential we have in the labor 
movement. If the destiny and control of the 

Under the Covers 


nations of Latin America can be locked up by the 
labor movement, those labor movements can be the 

most powerful force for unlocking such control. 

Our labor movement cannot only unlock control 
of our Latin American policy by AIFLD, we can un- 
lock the CIA influence on our own labor movement. 
We can return to the needed business of organizing 
the unorganized which was put aside to make way 
for labor- corporate -government collaboration. We 
can unlock the control of the great multinational 
monopolies which have incorporated the Nixon gov- 
ernment so neatly into their national ripoff of 
our labor and our lives. 

To do so, we must take the foreign policy 
decisionmaking out of Jay Lovestone's backroom. 

The issues must be brought back to the rank-and- 
file to be determined in a truly democratic fash- 
ion- The American Institute for Free Labor De- 
velopment must be abolished, with all it repre- 
sents. It is time for a brand new policy of 
international labor solidarity based strictly on 
equality, without intervention, without any more 
money under the table, and without the CXA. 

The unions of Great Britain, France and Swe- 
den are showing their solidarity with the working 
people of Chile by boycotting production and 
shipping destined for the junta. The Chileans 
need our cooperation in that effort* 

With liberal governments existing today in 
Peru and Venezuela, the danger of repeated inter- 
vention by AIFLD on behalf of the multinationals 
is imminent. Action to terminate the AIFLD is 
needed - not just for our own honor and economic 
well-being - but as a matter of life and death 
by our trade union brothers and sisters in Latin 


Under the Covers 


The foreign policy of the AFL-CIO as it is 
reflected in AIFLD is not set in concrete it 
is largely based on the myths and prejudices that 
became an habitual part of our thinking during 
the developing "cold war." For too many years 
our heads were whipped into conformity by the 
ism of Joe McCarthy. Under such conditions, it 
Is not surprising that the labor movement has 
failed to question and defeat AIFLD policies 
One large reason why the booming voice of the 
rank-and-file has not been raised against AIFLD 
is that we have not really known about it* 

The fact is that meetings in most unions 
never get past unfinished business. We hardly 
ever deal with questions of foreign affairs. In- 
stead, we leave such matters in the smooth hands 
of the Lovestones and the Dohertys, who gladly 
take our power and prestige to use as they see 
fit, m conjunction with the multinationals and 
the State Department, The AIFLD operation never 
nas been passed upon by the AFL-CIO membership, 
it is time now to move the agenda to unfinished 
business, and finish with AIFLD. 

There is a basic lie put forward by AIFLD, 
a lie which powers the machine. Amid the puffery 
and pictures which adorn the ten-year report of 
AIFLD is the statement that, "AIFLD has had the 
wholehearted backing of -..-most importantly- the 
vast majority of workers belonging to both the 
North and South American labor movements." This 
lie is the weakness of AIFLD, and because of the 
lie, it can be stopped. 

We could spend a hundred pages documenting 
the fact that AIFLD is scorned by working people 
from Mexico to Argentina, AIFLD could reply with 
self* serving statistics and statements from 

Under the Covers 


hundreds of Latin American labor officials. 
One might be convinced by their affirmation of 
the lie, but not after visiting and talking with 
working people south of our border. 

To be convinced beyond doubt that their 
statement is a lie, it is necessary to consult 
"the vast majority of workers belonging to the 
North* ., American labor movement-" A sampling of 
this has been done. A young woman sat with a 
telephone in Southern California and called union 
offices inquiring about AIFLD, both by its ini- 
tials and by name. The response was that no more 
than two out of fifty labor officials knew even 
the barest detail about the organization. On the 
jobs and in the shops the response is clearer — 
not a single one of hundreds of union members 
canvassed had any idea at all of the existence of 

AIFLD has none of the "wholehearted backing" 
it boasts. It is based on a lie* but this lie 
will continue to be sufficient until it is chal- 
lenged. The perverted foreign affairs of the AFL- 
CIO will persist so long as the men and women in 
the shops and on the jobs in the United States 
remain uninformed about the AIFLD. 

AIFLD has been used as the cutting edge of 
multinational corporate strategy in Latin America. 
Of course, many of the men and women who work in 
AIFLD do so in honesty and with naive good inten- 
tions, but the program has served to neutralize, 
divide and, as in Chile r attack the movement of 
working people. Where AIFLD tactics have failed 
to insure expanding profits for the multinationals j 
it has enlisted the State Department, CIA and 
Pentagon for economic blockades, military coups 
and direct military force. The working people 
upon whom the strength of the AFL-CIO is based 
have no idea that our movement is the vanguard 
of this web of strategy. By raising the issue 

Under the Covers 

on the floors of union meetings and labor coun- 
cils, the rank-and-file can come to understand 
what is happening and, with that awareness, move 
to control the International Affairs Department 

of the JUTL-CIQ and dissolve the American Insti- 
tute for Free Labor Development. 

The AIPLD program of hemispheric pacifica- 
tion can be stopped by the rank-and-file. We 
can blunt the edge of the most valuable cutting 
tool of the multinational corporations by passing 
resolutions in union after union and in labor 
councils in every major city. We can confront 
the AIFLD before the rank-and-file, and demolish 
the Meany- Loves tone lie of "wholehearted backing. 1 ' 
To continue to function, AIFLD must have a pro- 
tective blanket of rank-and-file silence. That 
silence can become peals of thunder if we can 
move AIFLD out from the shadows of ignorance so 
it can be seen for what it is by union members 
across the United States. 

Trade unionists in the United states will 
not be able to deal successfully with the great 
multinational corporations until we can end the 
policies reflected in AIFLD. We will never be 
able to act in solidarity with working people in 
Latin America until the AFL-CIO stops the pro- 
gram of division and subversion of independent 
and militant unions. 

By ending that policy, we can cement the 
solidarity needed to take on the multinationals 
and break the corporate grip which exploits and 
threatens working men and women throughout our 


WHEREAS there is abundant evidence 
that the AFL-CIO has been involved in 
Latin America and the Caribbean in ac- 
tions that violate basic labor princi- 
ples, and 

actions have 

it appears that U.S. labor 
been instrumental in pre- 

cipitating governmental takeovers and 
violence against unionists and working 
people abroad; and 

WHEREAS the AFL-CIO, through the 
American Institute for Free Labor De- 
velopment, has involved the labor 
movement in questionable relations with 
multinational corporations, the Li. S. 
State Department and the CIA; 

THEREFORE, unless the AFL-CIO 

Executive Council can provide contrary 
evi den te , 

BE IT RESOLVED that this Labor 
Council disassociate itself from any 
further actions of the AIFLD, and de- 
mand the dissolution of the Institute 
and complete disentanglement of the 
AFL-CIO International Relations Depart- 
ment with government and business 
strategies abroad. 


WHEREAS the reports quotes annaroMii ...»h 
Mtic documents linking tS« AFL-CIO wfth Jntf 

s hYaTtf "t^T S ^ ch >»«™:.nt ag es 
Jr., e ; ifl 1n Latin America, and suerifiJaiu !. 

2Irt£«"iSJi?K!» i n a 5 or w»i««o c y t : 

(AfFLDj; i"^ 1 *"* 6 f ° r Fr6e Ub0r B««lopw n t 
.,<**. WH E REflS the report charges that AIF! n art* 

b «i'in?:?:,j, on ;? i th u 5 e i.2 ,,t * ?yMt,; ' •''■*"" & 
««r^. „"j; t o ; n fs: d , s^"- n * »■ w 

beha,f of all „or*i ng peo^rhere^abrSad. 

Respectful Jy submitted by AFT Local 


[Passed at meeting of ;mt> /■!=...» e~ 
Labor Council, MonoI^S^'t^^f CentraT 



Alba, Victor, Politics and the Labor Movements 

in Latin America. Stanford, CA. , Stanford Univ. 

Press, 1968. 
Alexander, Robert J., Organised Labor in Latin 

America* New York, The Free Press, 1965. 
Aronowitz, Stanley, False Promises* The Shaping 

of American Working Clues Consciousness * New- 
York, McGraw Bill, 1973. 
Boyce, Richard O. and Herbert M. Morals, Labor 1 & 

Untold Story, New York, United Electrical 

Workers, 3rd Ed., 1972. 
Dulles, Foster Rhea, Lobar tn America* A Sistory* 

New York, Thomas Y. Crowell Co. , 1960. 
Foner, Philip S, , American Labor and the Indochina 

War: The Growth of Union Opposition* New York, 

International Publishers, 1971. 
Foster, William Z., Outline History of the World 

Trade Union Movement. New York, international 

Publishers, 1956. 
Gerassi, John, The Great Fear in Latin America. 

New York, Collier Books , 6th printing, 1971. 
Godard, Eduardo Lab area, Chile Inuadido, Santiago, 

Editor a Austral, 1969. 
Gompers, Samuel, Seventy Years of Life and Labor. 

New York, E.P. Dutton & Co., 19 43. 
Hawkins, Carroll, Two Democratic Labor Leaders in 

Conflict! The Latin American Revolution and the 

Role of the Workers. Lexington, Mass. , Lexing- 
ton Books, 1973- 
Levenstein, Harvey A., Labor Organisations in the 

United States and Mexico* Westport, Conn* , 

Greenwood Publishing Co. , 1971. 
Lieuwen, Edwin, Arms and Politics in Latin America* 

New York, Fraeger, 1967, 
Light, Robert E, and Carl Marzani, Cuba vs. the 

CIA* New York, Marzani & Munsell, 1961. 
Lipset, Seymour M. , Martin Trow and James Coleman, 

Union Democracy* The Internal politics of the 

International Typographical Union. Garden City, 

Doubleday Anchor , 1956. 



Mader, Julius, Who f s Who in the CIA." Berlin, 

Published by the author, 196 8. 
McCoy, Alfred W, , The Politico of Heroin in 

Southeast A$ia. New York, Harper & Row, 1972* 
McGarvey, Patrick J., CIA 3 the Myth and the 

tvadne&8 f Baltimore, Penguin Books, 1972* 
Mills, C. Wright, Power Polities and People* 

New York, Ballantirs, 1963, 
Morris, ■ George, The CIA' and American Labor. 

New York, International, 1967. 
Petras, James and Maurice Zeitlin, Latin Americas: 

Reform or Revolution? a Reader* New York, 

Fawcett, 196 9* 
Radosh, Ronald, American Labor and United States 

Foreign Policy* New York, Random House, 1969, 
Romualdi, Serafino, presidents and Peons, New 

York, Funk & Wagnalls, 1967. 
Smith, Richard Harris, OSS: The Secret History of 

America* & First Central Intelligence Agency. 

Berkeley, Univ. of California Press, 1972, 
Sturmthal, Adolf and James G. Scoville, The Inter- 

national Labor Movement in Transition. Urban a, 

Univ. of Illinois Press, 1973, 
Wimdmuller , John P. , International Trade Union 

Organisations: Structure* Functions and Limita- 
tions. New York, Harper & Row, 19 6 7, 
Zink, Dolph Warren, The Political Bisks for Multi- 
national Corporations in Developing Countrie8. 

New York, Praeger, 1973. 

Galeano, Eduardo, "The Open Veins of Latin America." 
[Translated by Cedrie Belf rage* 3 Monthly 'Review, 


Berger, Henry W. , "American Labor Overseas." The 
Nation, January 16, 1967. 

Bodenheimer, Susan, "The AFL-CIO in Latin America- 
The Dominican Republic: A Case Study," Viet 
Report, Septembers-October, 1967. "U.S. Labor's 
Conservative Role in Latin America." The Pro- 
gressivej November, 1967. 

Braden, Thomas W. , "I'm Glad the CIA is Immoral." 
Saturday Evening Poet* May 20, 196 7. 



Grace, J- Peter, "Labor Group Boosts Living 

Standards," The Journal of Commerce, April 4, 
Jerome, Gail S. , "American Labor in Latin America. 

Cross Currents* XXI, iii, 1971. 
Kurzman, Dan, "Labor's Cold Warrior," Washtngton 
Post j December 30, 1965. "Loves tone's Cold 
War." The New Repub lie a June 25, 1966, 
Lens, Sidney, "Lovestone Diplomacy." The Nation* 
July 5, 1965. "Labor Between Bread and Revolu- 
tion." The Nation, September 19, 1966. 
North American Congress on Latin America [NACLA] . 
Latin America & Empire Report, October, 1973. 
"New Chile," NACLA, 1972. 
Romualdi, Serafino, "The Latin Labor Leader - 
Democratic and Dedicated." The American 
Federationi$tj April, 1964. ^ 

Simons, Marlise, "The Brazilian Connection. 

Washington Post, January 6, 1974. 
TIME Magazine, September 24, IS 73. 
Winship, North, "The American and the Confederate 
Avanti s October 16, 1918. 


American Institute for Free Labor Development, 

1962-1972. A Decade of Worker to Work Coopera- 
tion, Washington, D.C. 

\ ■*" 
The AXFLD Report r Washington, D.C. 

United States Senate, Committee on Foreign Relatione 
Hearing on AIFLD with George Meany, August 1, 
1969, Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing 
Office. , 

"Survey of the Alliance for Progress. Compila- 
tion of Studies and Hearings of Subcommittee oi 
American Republic Affairs, April 29, 1969, 
Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Offn 

Meany, George, National Press Club Speech," as 

reprinted in Congressional Record, July 25, 1967, 
pp. H9370-72, 
University of Chicago Research Center in Economic 
Development and Change. "United states-Latin 

American Relations. United States Business and 
Labor in Latin America. 11 Study prepared at re- 
guest of Subcommittee on American Republic 
Affairs, Committee on Foreign Relations* V.S* 
Senate, Washington, D.C., 1960, 


A direct and tight view from the ranks of 
labor - salty with bias and bitter with facts 
an invitation for change.